IcePath icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
← New Search ↗ Social Card

Sarah Levitt Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin Country: USA
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

NCAA D3 / D2

Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw PPG  ·  ■ Solid blue = age-adjusted NCAAe-PPG  ·  ■ Green = actual college PPG
Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP G A Pts PPG NCAAe-PPG Age-Adj D3e-PPG Age-Adj
2012-13 Orono High USHS-MN-W 22 1 3 4 0.182 0.0275 0.0275 — —
2013-14 Blake School (W) USHS-MN-W 25 3 3 6 0.240 0.0362 0.0362 — —
2014-15 Blake School (W) USHS-MN-W 19 2 5 7 0.368 0.0556 0.0556 — —
2015-16 Blake School (W) USHS-MN-W 25 2 5 7 0.280 0.0423 0.0423 — —
2016-17 Blake School (W) USHS-MN-W 21 5 2 7 0.333 0.0503 0.0503 — —
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div Conference Year GP G A Pts PPG
2019-20 Williams D3 NESCAC — 14 0 0 0 0.000
2017-18 Williams D3 NESCAC FR 8 0 0 0 0.000

NCAAe Rankings

#11820
Forward overall
#4328
in USHS-MN-W

D1 Comparables

Presley Norby
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Wisconsin (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Average
NCAAe PPG
Laura Anderson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Yale (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Heise
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.90 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Sierra Smith
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.40 PPG
→ Minnesota
0.06 No data
NCAAe PPG
Katie McMillan
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Penn State (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Amanda Smythe
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2024-25
0.105 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Talon Berlando
Wisconsin-Superior · 2004-05
0.609 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Karin Knapp
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2015-16
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG

How to read this: NCAAe and D3e factors convert a player's junior PPG into expected NCAA scoring at the D1 or D3 level. Harder conferences → lower projected PPG for the same player. A strong junior player (e.g. USHL 0.90 PPG) will project much higher in NESCAC than Big Ten because the D3 scoring environment is lower-difficulty.

Strength factor: conferences above 1.0 are harder than average; below 1.0 are easier. The formula is: Base NCAAe PPG ÷ Conference Strength = Projected PPG.